Player Discussion Andrew Peeke

[LSCII]

No it's not the point.

How do you know that a 14 year old today will turn into Chris Pelosi in 3 years?

How do you know that Pelosi or that 2017 third round pick doesn't turn out to be Anthony Camara?

I can make the argument that Boston's 4th rounder from last year (Hendrickson) is better than their third rounder last year (Pelosi).

It's a crap shoot.

I've seen people pointing to how far in the future the pick is to justify it not being an overpay, but in reality it actually signifies how far Columbus was willing to go to dump the salary of a player they were no long using.

 

[Number8]

The point is that they probably could have gotten Peeke for a third and had CBJ retain. But the Bruins wanted a contract spot. Peeke in would have left them with no contact spots.

Hence Zboril. Rather than retain 15 to 18 percent, CBJ took on the balance of the Zboril money, but more importantly the contract.

Now, whether the Bruins get to make use of that spot is still to be determined. They lost out on Graf which would have required that spot. There is still Bengtsson (as early as next week) and Tsyplakov (May 1). So we will see.

Not always black and white.

Dom, will you please — please — not introduce logic and facts into this discussion. I was all set to see the reintroduction of the magic “poor asset management” debate for the 78th time (I do so enjoy it). I fear that you’ve now gone and ruined that prospect.

 

[the negotiator]

Dom, will you please — please — not introduce logic and facts into this discussion. I was all set to see the reintroduction of the magic “poor asset management” debate for the 78th time (I do so enjoy it). I fear that you’ve now gone and ruined that prospect.

Yup...there goes Dom again inserting facts, objectivity and insight when other posters would just rather howl at the moon

Eye test says Peeke was a good acquisition for a reasonable price ...the kind of deals that take a team from pretender to contender

 

[NDiesel]

I've seen people pointing to how far in the future the pick is to justify it not being an overpay, but in reality it actually signifies how far Columbus was willing to go to dump the salary of a player they were no long using.

So what would have been fair value in your opinion? 2027 5th? 6th? Like what is it we are even arguing over, a few rounds of overpayment?

 

[DominicT]

I've seen people pointing to how far in the future the pick is to justify it not being an overpay, but in reality it actually signifies how far Columbus was willing to go to dump the salary of a player they were no long using.

Fair enough. Let me ask you this:

Would your opinion on what they paid have changed if the deal was actually

2027 3rd round pick + Zboril

For

Peeke + anyone they can get because of the contract spot they acquired by adding in Zboril?

Or would you rather;

2027 3rd round pick

For

Peeke with 20 percent retained?

 

[CDJ]

So what would have been fair value in your opinion? 2027 5th? 6th? Like what is it we are even arguing over, a few rounds of overpayment?

People would just bitch n moan about who they take in the late 3rd anyway, just like they did last draft (and wow shocker the pick looks pretty good)

A late 3rd doesn’t have much value, I still fail to see how it’s an overpay. For perspective it cost more to acquire a rental John Michael Liles

 

[Gordon Lightfoot]

Unless someone is the GM or knows them personally, the concept of "overpay" or "fair price" strikes me as just a guessing game. It just doesn't make sense. Sure, it's sports, so speculating and second guessing is fun and part of the deal. But it's not like going to the store and buying a shirt.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Unless someone is the GM or knows them personally, the concept of "overpay" or "fair price" strikes me as just a guessing game. It just doesn't make sense. Sure, it's sports, so speculating and second guessing is fun and part of the deal. But it's not like going to the store and buying a shirt.

I mean if you can’t evaluate a trade as it happens then what are we doing here? Of course time changes perceptions, like for example the drafting of Trent Frederic and John Beecher.

 

[Gordon Lightfoot]

I mean if you can’t evaluate a trade as it happens then what are we doing here? Of course time changes perceptions, like for example the drafting of Trent Frederic and John Beecher.

You definitely can, and that's a huge part of the appeal of boards like this. My point is I find it tiresome when price and value are presented as facts, not opinions. There is no single price for a single player.

 

[ranold26]

A 2027 3rd rounder is essentially a 2026 4th rounder or a 2025 5th or a 2024 6th rounder....
Not to mention that it likely will be a mid-low pick in the round.
Not expensive at all.

 

[HustleB]

We still gonna hold onto this eh?

It’s ok you can let go. He did a good thing, it’s fine to admit that. You are allowed to change your opinion when given new info. This kid is a good player and we are quite fortunate to have gotten him for what should be a late 3rd in 3 years

It's so far away that we can only hope it will be a late 3rd but that's splitting hairs. What a great deal.

 

[HustleB]

The haters doubling down reminds me of when the Seny pick was defended. That was a bad moment on the site too.

I defended that pick for waaaaay too long. Then I jumped on the Studnicka bandwagon just to really double down on my genius takes.

 

[LSCII]

Fair enough. Let me ask you this:

Would your opinion on what they paid have changed if the deal was actually

2027 3rd round pick + Zboril

For

Peeke + anyone they can get because of the contract spot they acquired by adding in Zboril?

Or would you rather;

2027 3rd round pick

For

Peeke with 20 percent retained?

Out of your scenarios, I’d have done Peeke and 20% retained because Zboril is a ufa at the end of the year and I don’t care if the organization has to eat his money for a few months more while he winds down his time here in Providence. Or Peeke + for eating the full salary.

 

[goldnblack]

This thread is like people at the all you can eat buffet in Vegas complaining because there are no crab legs while they're eating prime rib

 

[Dr Hook]

Out of your scenarios, I’d have done Peeke and 20% retained because Zboril is a ufa at the end of the year and I don’t care if the organization has to eat his money for a few months more while he winds down his time here in Providence. Or Peeke + for eating the full salary.

But the contract spot: would you rather they kept Zboril who is finished in the org, or had a spot to sign another college/Euro FA? They lose that opportunity by keeping Zboril.

 

[bb_fan]

This thread is like people at the all you can eat buffet in Vegas complaining because there are no crab legs while they're eating prime rib

One man's prime rib is anothers crab leg....

 

[LSCII]

But the contract spot: would you rather they kept Zboril who is finished in the org, or had a spot to sign another college/Euro FA? They lose that opportunity by keeping Zboril.

Who’d they sign with that spot? I mean it’s funny to me how people can say it was great value because whatever player they picked 3 years from now in the third round won’t make it, but then it becomes vital they move Zboril for an opportunity to sign a college kid or some euro who probably won’t make it.

Seems to me some folks want to have it both ways. If a third round pick in the future doesn’t matter, then neither does the opportunity to sign some rando overage college kid, no?

 

[NDiesel]

Who’d they sign with that spot? I mean it’s funny to me how people can say it was great value because whatever player they picked 3 years from now in the third round won’t make it, but then it becomes vital they move Zboril for an opportunity to sign a college kid or some euro who probably won’t make it.

Seems to me some folks want to have it both ways. If a third round pick in the future doesn’t matter, then neither does the opportunity to sign some rando overage college kid, no?

No one is saying a 3rd round pick in 2027 doesn't matter, just that it's value today isn't very high.

Think of it in terms of an investment. You're basically saying whats difference in having 5 dollars today when you can have a 5 dollar scratch ticket in 3 years.

Well much like you can invest that 5 dollars over the next 3 years to bring it's value higher you have 3 years of development of that "rando college kid" that the team personally overlooks, which is why that contract spot might be important. And of course there's always that chance the 5 dollar scratch ticket gives you more than your investment.

Also I think everyone would agree that both a 3rd round in 2027 and a college FA hold very little value today anyway

 

[Dr Hook]

Who’d they sign with that spot? I mean it’s funny to me how people can say it was great value because whatever player they picked 3 years from now in the third round won’t make it, but then it becomes vital they move Zboril for an opportunity to sign a college kid or some euro who probably won’t make it.

Seems to me some folks want to have it both ways. If a third round pick in the future doesn’t matter, then neither does the opportunity to sign some rando overage college kid, no?

I am not saying the third rounder is negligible- Marchand came out of the third round, for example, and so did plenty of other solid NHLers. But, ff there is a college/Euro FA that might be of more immediate help than a third rounder in three drafts, and one they are interested in, then it makes sense. I am on the side that says a third rounder was not a high price to pay, but it's obviously not nothing or Columbus would not have taken it. I think we can agree the third rounder means something, but differ on whether it was good value for Peeke, and whether Zboril was a good value for the contract slot to make the deal work. No need to have it both ways, I don't think.

 

[4ORRBRUIN]

Can't believe we are still taking about this after all the time that's past and watching this kid play.

Would we be butt hurt if the Bruins Peeke was the player we gave a third and took on salary to obtain? Me think we would be doing cartwheels down causeway.

 

[dangermike]

Can't believe we are still taking about this after all the time that's past and watching this kid play.

Would we be butt hurt if the Bruins Peeke was the player we gave a third and took on salary to obtain? Me think we would be doing cartwheels down causeway.

thats too reasonable. we dont do that shit here.

 

[Kalus]

Unless someone is the GM or knows them personally, the concept of "overpay" or "fair price" strikes me as just a guessing game. It just doesn't make sense. Sure, it's sports, so speculating and second guessing is fun and part of the deal. But it's not like going to the store and buying a shirt.

Well the league’s a market place where contracts are largely driven by comparables. Agents and teams both try to find favorable comparables to their causes and the contract usually ends up within a fairly tight range of what the media and fans guessed. Sometimes we’re surprised, but usually it’s pretty predictable.

 

[dafoomie]

Can't believe we are still taking about this after all the time that's past and watching this kid play.

Would we be butt hurt if the Bruins Peeke was the player we gave a third and took on salary to obtain? Me think we would be doing cartwheels down causeway.

There is a school of thought that says defensive defensemen aren't effective, only puck moving defensemen are worth having, so I think it's less about the return and more about having this type of player at all.

 

[goldnblack]

There is a school of thought that says defensive defensemen aren't effective, only puck moving defensemen are worth having, so I think it's less about the return and more about having this type of player at all.

I think respectfully, that take is largely totally worth disregarding. People can't even follow the bouncing ball on this anymore the takes are so scrambled.

*Puck moving defensemen, are great, till they're too small! See Gryz

Yeah no kidding. If Gryz was 6'3 he could be a 7M player.

*The Bruins need more size and toughness!

Ok sure, but that almost never comes in the package of a puck mover. The puck movers with size and toughness get paid Charlie money and don't grow on trees either.

*We could cut Charlie's minutes if we get him off the PK

That too, is rarely a magical puck mover helping accomplish that.


Here's the facts: For under 3M, you get some size and toughness, with definite PK ability that has totally changed the minute distribution of our blueline. HIs very presence has made the shift of Hampus up with Charlie possible, which in turn has created a super pairing there. And come playoff time, a hard simple clear in a series of attrition can be the right play, which is why I'm very optimistic for these playoffs. I also think if Peeke and Wotherspoon were on the blueline last year, we beat Florida.

 

[TD Charlie]

I think respectfully, that take is largely totally worth disregarding. People can't even follow the bouncing ball on this anymore the takes are so scrambled.

*Puck moving defensemen, are great, till they're too small! See Gryz

Yeah no kidding. If Gryz was 6'3 he could be a 7M player.

*The Bruins need more size and toughness!

Ok sure, but that almost never comes in the package of a puck mover. The puck movers with size and toughness get paid Charlie money and don't grow on trees either.

*We could cut Charlie's minutes if we get him off the PK

That too, is rarely a magical puck mover helping accomplish that.


Here's the facts: For under 3M, you get some size and toughness, with definite PK ability that has totally changed the minute distribution of our blueline. HIs very presence has made the shift of Hampus up with Charlie possible, which in turn has created a super pairing there. And come playoff time, a hard simple clear in a series of attrition can be the right play, which is why I'm very optimistic for these playoffs. I also think if Peeke and Wotherspoon were on the blueline last year, we beat Florida.

Interesting you mention this, I heard Billy Jaffe mention this recently on his podcast with Razor. I hadn't thought about it until he said it, but I can definitely remember times in the last couple weeks that they opted to just punt, as Jaffe put it. Don't try skating it out cleanly or going for the outlet. Just gather, turn, and fire. Catch a blow and regroup.

Of course it can't be the strategy on every entry into their end of the ice, but here and there it's fine. I guess I would rather they just fire it down the other end or lob it 100 ft sometimes than make a risky play up the middle to a forward. Not sure if this change has been a Monty thing, or a product of the roster, but I like it